Oilers @ Leafs - Feb. 7th, 7:00pm - CBC, Fan 590

[bustaheims]

I too thought he handled himself just fine in that interview. 

I don't think he's used that excuse...yet.

All I wanted him to say was that he had to play harder when he got his spot in the line-up back. He had two opportunities to say something like that and both times he directly placed the blame of his scratch on the fact that the whole team hasn't been playing well.

Yeah. It's really not that hard for him to say he hasn't been good enough or he needs to be better. Take some ownership of your scratch. Don't blame the team for your lack of positive contributions.

 

[skrackle]

I too thought he handled himself just fine in that interview. 

I don't think he's used that excuse...yet.

All I wanted him to say was that he had to play harder when he got his spot in the line-up back. He had two opportunities to say something like that and both times he directly placed the blame of his scratch on the fact that the whole team hasn't been playing well.

Yeah. It's really not that hard for him to say he hasn't been good enough or he needs to be better. Take some ownership of your scratch. Don't blame the team for your lack of positive contributions.

Clarkson's ice time and powerplay time has all been part of the process of justifying the ridiculous contract. Nonis has been in denial. I don't know if he sent a directive to the coaching staff to play Clarkson no matter what, but it sure seems that way. And just to be clear, this is a failure of management. If I were Clarkson, would I turn down that contract?

I really don't have much of an opinion on Horachek one way or the other. He's been put between a rock and a hard place and will likely lose his job as a result of Shanahan's evaluation process. But I do like the benching of Clarkson. It's a statement by Horachek that stands out.

 

[Chris]

I thought Clarkson handled the interview OK. Yes, he could have put more of the blame on himself or said he would work harder, but at least he didn't resort to "you think this (losing streak) is my fault?"

As for the relative value of him versus Smith...yes, I realize Smith is a center and also a more effective defensive player. But I don't necessarily agree that those attributes give him the edge. I think Clarkson has been misused to some extent...he obviously doesn't belong on the PP but on the 4th line. And Booth has been terrible all year. Yes he looked great last night, but come on...it was Edmonton. Let's see how he looks against the Rangers.

Panik should definitely be in the lineup over both Clarkson and Booth (and Smith).

 

[Rebel_1812]

It's an interesting situation with Clarkson. I mean, he is what he is - I don't think the issue is lack of effort, it's just that he's not all that talented. And it's not (entirely) his fault that he was signed to that big contract.

So what is the benefit to sitting him out in favor of Smith? Does Smith bring more to the team? I don't think so. So was the benching a way to send a message that results matter, regardless of contract status? If so, perhaps it would be more effective to have benched Kessel or Bozak or JVR. I know we won the game, but it was Edmonton. The Marlies might have been able to beat them.

I could see sitting him in order to give a young player a shot, or if he is about to be traded (one can dream, right?)...but not clear about the motivation here. Guess we'll know more after the next few games against better teams.

Smith plays a different position. But even beyond that, he knows how to play defence and is thereby useful as a role player. Clarkson does literally everything extremely poorly and fits in nowhere. His linemates and the team as a whole suffer when he plays.

how did he make the NHL then?  Did the coach in NJ think the worse player available was the one that should make the training camp cut.  The rhetoric here sometimes reaches ridiculous levels.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

how did he make the NHL then?  Did the coach in NJ think the worse player available was the one that should make the training camp cut.  The rhetoric here sometimes reaches ridiculous levels.

A players effectiveness has never changed throughout his NHL career.

 

[Rebel_1812]

how did he make the NHL then?  Did the coach in NJ think the worse player available was the one that should make the training camp cut.  The rhetoric here sometimes reaches ridiculous levels.

A players effectiveness has never changed throughout his NHL career.

if he is as bad as you say, he never makes the cut at training camp.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

how did he make the NHL then?  Did the coach in NJ think the worse player available was the one that should make the training camp cut.  The rhetoric here sometimes reaches ridiculous levels.

A players effectiveness has never changed throughout his NHL career.

if he is as bad as you say, he never makes the cut at training camp.

Because every roster decision in the NHL is made based solely on merit.